Nikon 18-105mm VR lens quality?

Lead Farmer

Lead Farmer

Messages
55
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
A quick question regarding the quality of this lens please.

Been thinking of buying this to replace the kit 18-55 that came with my D5000. I also have a Tamron 70-300mm and I love its zoom ability, so the 18-105 lens would serve me well.

Zoom length aside, is this lens regarded as just being of the same kit lens quality as my 18-55? Can it produce better quality pictures or is the quality just the same?

I guess my other option is to replace my Tamron 70-300 instead, with a Nikon equivalent?
 
Last edited:
I haven't compared these lenses on the same body, but I would consider the 18-105 to be noticeably sharper than the 18-55. Here's DxOMark's comparison - clicky.
 
Hi Steve,

Owning both the 18-55 and 18-105 I feel qualified to answer your question: the 18-105 knocks the socks off its smaller brother.

Yes, it feels like a kit lens - because it is one - but aside from the older 18-70 it's arguably the best kit lens Nikon has made. I can't remember the last time I used my 18-55 as I've never been entirely happy with its IQ or zoom range ... if I could prise the 18-105 off my grandson's camera I'd use it more :D

Having said all that, replacing your Tamron with the Nikkor 70-300 VR you'll see a much bigger difference than cjanging the kit lens. You just have to decide which end of the zoom range is more important to you.
 
Thanks for the replies. I guess your right Bristolian about deciding which end of the zoom I need.

Cheers:)
 
I've owned the 18-55 (non VR), the 18-105 VR and the 18-70 (non VR). Image quality on the 18-105 seemed a lot better to me than the 18-55. It had a non rotating front element, which was great for polarisers and the VR function at the long end was great. It just feels like a better quality lens. However, as i progressed further with my photography, i realised my images were always a bit soft. I decided to go for an 18-70 that my mate was selling and i haven't looked back. I don't miss the longer reach, (you have a 70-300 to cover that), and if you feel like you could sacrifice VR for sharper images, the 18-70 is well worth a look
 
Another vote in support of the 18-105. I had one of these until I knocked my tripod over, a year ago last Bonfire Night.

It's a pretty versatile focal range for general purpose photography and saved me a lot of lens swapping while I had it. It's sharper than the 18-55 kit lens and defends quite well against chromatic aberration, though it's certainly not immune. I recall some barrel distortion at the wide end through slight pin-cushion at the long end, but I never felt either were extreme or distracting.

It's an adequately built lens, but certainly feels like a consumer product. But, as has been pointed out, it very much is. The polymer lens mount on mine arguably did its job when my D2x face-planted from 6ft into the mud. The lens was totalled, but the D2x didn't skip a beat - shook the lens mount splinters out of the body, dropped my new paperweight back in the bag, stuck on a 35mm and carried on shooting. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top